On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Greg KH wrote: > Bleah. I understand that you would like to track fds purely for an > audit case (from the kernel standpoint, the fd doesn't mean much at all, > the struct file * means everything.) But why can't you simply get the > fd from the struct file * if you really want it? That doesn't burden > the hook interface to pass another variable that almost no security > module will need. Although I'm not a fan of passing the fd, it isn't clear to me that SGI can readily obtain the fd from the 'struct file *'. Wouldn't they have to search through the file descriptor table for a match, yielding race conditions? And what if multiple descriptors referenced the same struct file? I suppose that may not be important if they just want a handle for the file. In any event, it would be helpful if the SGI folks could explain why they want a fd for each hook to which they've added such a parameter and could make the case that the 'struct file' is inadequate for providing equivalent functionality. Why audit the fd instead of a pathname generated from the struct file? If you are simply looking for a small handle to reference a given file for numerous audit records, you can always create and maintain your own mapping from integer handles to files without needing to deal with the non-persistent per-process fd values. > About moving the hooks before the DAC checks, I don't really mind this, > but I know some people will have a real problem with this. Anyone else > want to comment on this? Speak up now, or have to change your security > module greatly later :) Do you know why "some people" will have a problem with this change? It doesn't seem like it should affect any of us with restrictive access control modules, and it does provide desirable support for MAC policies. -- Stephen D. Smalley, NAI Labs ssmalleyat_private _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jul 17 2001 - 12:11:34 PDT